4 ms·
>I always admire high achievers who cop to having worked damn hard to get where they are. The article means to suggest otherwise, but I can't imagine Usain Bolt
by xiaoma 17y ago
>I always admire high achievers who cop to having worked damn hard to get where they are. The article means to suggest otherwise, but I can't imagine Usain Bolt is anything even vaguely resembling lazy.
Sometimes the truth isn't what we want it to be.
As a 12 year-old without track & field training or experience, he was the fastest boy in his school. His interest was in cricket, but once he got to high school, his cricket coach noticed his exceptional speed and encouraged him to do track. Within two years, he posted a time of 20.61s for a 200 meter race! That's faster than many of the 200m times posted in the 2008 Olympics. In fact, 20.61 would have been fast enough to qualify in 7 of the 8 heats.
He did that at age 15. Think about it.
Gladwell's 10,000 hours yarn is bullshit. There is talent, and Bolt's got so much of it that he's been regularly demolishing more experienced, harder working opponents for his entire career.
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/people/Usain-Bolt/biography/ http://www.monstersandcritics.com/people/Usain-Bolt/biograph...
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSISS99256920080818 http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSISS99256920080818
- philk 17y agoGladwell's 10,000 hours yarn is bullshit. There is talent, and Bolt's got so much of it that he's been regularly demolishing more experienced, harder working opponents for his entire career. Good post. However, I think this needs to be clarified; running really fast is something that has a strong genetic component and a weak skill component. The idea that greatness is mostly the result of focused practice is more likely to hold true in fields with a strong skill component (for example learning to play the violin or writing code).
- pavs 17y agoSo I guess there is still hope that I can be the greatest programmer in the world and don't have to rely on my genes. Awesome :)
- xiaoma 17y agoMusical talent may not have been the best example to choose to make Gladwell's point. Not only is genetics demonstrably important for musicians, but we even know that the strongly influencing genes come from a certain segment of chromosome 4. http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/musical-talent-genes-16460.html http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/musical-talent-genes-16460.ht... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/musical-talent-proves-to-be-air-on-a-gene-string-695379.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/musical-talent-pro... http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/080429_music-genes.htm http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/080429_music-genes.h...
- karzeem 17y agoI didn't mean to imply that he doesn't have huge natural skill. He does, certainly. But what pushed him from a great runner to the greatest runner is a lot of focused training on his technique, and I'm sure that was arduous.